USPTO serial 76548667
SERVICE TODAY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NELSON, EDWARD
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with SERVICE TODAY?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Timothy E. Moses
TIMOTHY E MOSES HULL, TOWILL, NORMAN, BARRETT & SALLEY801 BROAD ST STE 700AUGUSTA, GA 30901UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | Electrical contractor services, namely, wiring or re-wiring of residential, commercial and industrial buildings | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 12, 2006 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jan 12, 2006 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| May 31, 2005 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| May 31, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 29, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 29, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 19, 2004 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Sep 30, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 30, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Mar 26, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 24, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 31, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |